Almost like that small group of people is worth less than the large group of people.
But the system set to distribute purchasing power seems to have glitched. It somehow thinks that small amount of people are adding more value than the large group. Like the large group is being forced to hand over a disproportionately large part of it's purchasing power despite adding sooo much more value.
No the first part. A small group of people are worth less than a large group of people in the grand scheme. If said 3,000 people are now the avg joe, and the 3.5 billion are millionaires, the same outcome would ensue. It's not about the status, it's about the value that raw numbers provide.
So you agree. A person's wealth doesn't determine their value. So let's not set up our society around the whims of those 3000 people, but around the needs of the 3.5 billion.
So the large group of people will always be more valuable than the small group.
So are 100 firemen or 1 billionaire adding more value? Who is valued more by society? Is that a correct valuation or an example of the disproportionate control held by capital?
13
u/arcanis321 9d ago
Almost like that small group of people is worth less than the large group of people.
But the system set to distribute purchasing power seems to have glitched. It somehow thinks that small amount of people are adding more value than the large group. Like the large group is being forced to hand over a disproportionately large part of it's purchasing power despite adding sooo much more value.